Withdrawal of digoxin from patients with chronic heart failure treated with angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors. RADIANCE Study

Digoxin Discontinuation in Patients With HFrEF on Beta-Blockers: Implication for Future 'Knock-Out Trials' in Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

National heart failure guidelines recommend quadruple therapy with renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), most of whom also receive loop diuretics. However, the guidelines are less clear about the safe approaches to discontinuing older drugs whose decreasing or residual benefit is less well understood. The objective of this study was to examine whether digoxin can be safely discontinued in patients with HFrEF receiving beta-blockers.

METHODS

In OPTIMIZE-HF, of 2477 patients with HFrEF (EF ≤45%) receiving beta-blockers and digoxin, digoxin was discontinued in 450 patients. We assembled a propensity score-matched cohort of 433 pairs of patients in which digoxin continuation vs. discontinuation groups were balanced on 51 baseline characteristics. Using the same approach, from 992 patients not on beta-blockers, we assembled a matched cohort of 198 pairs of patients also balanced on 51 baseline characteristics. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for 1-year outcomes were estimated.

RESULTS

Among patients receiving beta-blockers, digoxin discontinuation had no association with the combined endpoint of heart failure readmission or death (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.85-1.19), heart failure readmission (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.85-1.25) or death (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.72-1.14). Respective HRs (95% CIs) among patients not receiving beta-blockers were 1.60 (1.25-2.04), 1.62 (1.18-2.22) and 1.43 (1.08-1.89).

CONCLUSIONS

Digoxin can be discontinued without increasing the risk of adverse outcomes in patients with HFrEF receiving beta-blockers. Future studies need to examine the residual benefit of older heart failure drugs to ensure their safe discontinuation in patients with HFrEF receiving newer guideline-directed medical therapy.

The effect of down-titration and discontinuation of heart failure pharmacotherapy in older people: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The aim of this study was to investigate whether interventions to discontinue or down-titrate heart failure (HF) pharmacotherapy are feasible and associated with risks in older people. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Electronic databases were searched from inception to 8 March 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies included people with HF, aged ≥50 years and who discontinued or down-titrated HF pharmacotherapy. Outcomes were feasibility (whether discontinuation or down-titration of HF pharmacotherapy was sustained at follow-up) and associated risks (mortality, hospitalization, adverse drug withdrawal effects [ADWE]). Random-effects meta-analysis was performed when heterogeneity was not substantial (Higgins I2 < 70%). Sub-analysis by frailty status was conducted. Six RCTs (536 participants) and 27 observational studies (810 499 participants) across six therapeutic classes were included, for 3-260 weeks follow-up. RCTs were conducted in patients presenting with stable chronic HF. Down-titrating a renin-angiotensin system inhibitor (RASI) in patients with chronic kidney disease was 76% more likely than continuation (risk ratio [RR] 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14-2.73), with no difference in mortality (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.30-1.64). Discontinuation of beta-blockers were feasible compared to continuation in preserved ejection fraction (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68-1.47). Participants were 25% more likely to re-initiate discontinued diuretics (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.66-0.86). Digoxin discontinuation was associated with 5.5-fold risk of hospitalization compared to continuation. Worsening HF was the most common ADWE. One observational study measured frailty but did not report outcomes by frailty status. The appropriateness and associated risks of down-titrating or discontinuing HF pharmacotherapy in people aged ≥75 years is uncertain. Evaluation of outcomes by frailty status necessitates investigation.

Consequences of Discontinuing Long-Term Drug Treatment in Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction

There is uncertainty regarding the clinical effects of discontinuation of drugs for heart failure after long-term use. The withdrawal of long-term treatment can follow 1 of 4 distinct patterns: 1) loss of on-treatment effect with no observed changes following discontinuation (eg, prazosin); 2) attenuation or loss of on-treatment effect with rebound clinical worsening following discontinuation (eg, nitroprusside); 3) persistence of deleterious on-treatment effect followed by clinical worsening after discontinuation (eg, milrinone and flosequinan); and 4) persistence of favorable on-treatment effect followed by clinical worsening after discontinuation (eg, digoxin and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors). Persuasive evidence for persistence of efficacy has been demonstrated for the use of digoxin, diuretic agents, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, and (to a limited extent) for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. Available evidence for worsening of clinical status following the withdrawal of neurohormonal antagonists largely consists of observational studies. However, their findings are difficult to interpret because of considerable confounding related to the fact that drugs were withdrawn for clinical reasons, which represented a more important contributor to the poor outcome of these patients than the withdrawal of an effective drug. Nevertheless, the totality of available evidence points to a meaningful clinical deterioration within a few weeks following the withdrawal for most drugs that have been evaluated for the treatment of heart failure. These findings suggests that that our current emphasis on the implementation of foundational drugs needs to include an equally important emphasis to avoid even short-term gaps in treatment.

When cardiovascular medicines should be discontinued

An integral component of the practice of medicine is focused on the initiation of medications, based on clinical practice guidelines and underlying trial evidence, which usually test the addition of novel medications intended for life-long use in short-term clinical trials. Much less attention is given to the question of medication discontinuation, especially after a lengthy period of treatment, during which patients age gets older and diseases may either progress or new diseases may emerge. Given the paucity of data, clinical practice guidelines offer little to no guidance on when and how to deprescribe cardiovascular medications. Such decisions are often left to the discretion of clinicians, who, together with their patients, express concern of potential adverse effects of medication discontinuation. Even in the absence of adverse effects, the continuation of medications without any proven effect may cause harm due to drug-drug interactions, the emergence of polypharmacy, and additional preventable spending to already strained health systems. Herein, several cardiovascular medications or medication classes are discussed that in the opinion of this author group should generally be discontinued, either for the prevention of potential harm, for a lack of benefit, or for the availability of better alternatives.

Challenging and target-based shifting strategies for heart failure treatment: An update from the last decades

Heart failure (HF) is a major global health problem afflicting millions worldwide. Despite the significant advances in therapies and prevention, HF still carries very high morbidity and mortality, requiring enormous healthcare-related expenditure, and the search for new weapons goes on. Following initial treatment strategies targeting inotropism and congestion, attention has focused on offsetting the neurohormonal overactivation and three main therapies, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists, β-adrenoceptor antagonists, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, have been the foundation of standard treatment for patients with HF. Recently, a paradigm shift, including angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, and ivabradine, has been added. Moreover, soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator, elamipretide, and omecamtiv mecarbil have come out as a next-generation therapeutic agent for patients with HF. Although these pharmacologic therapies have been significantly successful in relieving symptoms, there is still no complete cure for HF. We may be currently entering a new era of treatment for HF with animal experiments and human clinical trials assessing the value of antibody-based immunotherapy and gene therapy as a novel therapeutic strategy. Such tempting therapies still have some challenges to be addressed but may become a weighty option for treatment of HF. This review article will compile the paradigm shifts in HF treatment over the past dozen years or so and illustrate current landscape of antibody-based immunotherapy and gene therapy as a new therapeutic algorithm for patients with HF.

Digoxin is Not Related to Mortality in Patients with Heart Failure: Results from the SELFIE-TR Registry

AIMS

Digoxin has been used in the treatment for heart failure for centuries, but the role of this drug in the modern era is controversial. A particular concern is the recent observational findings suggesting an increase in all-cause mortality with digoxin, although such observations suffer from biased results since these studies usually do not provide adequate compensation for the severity of disease. Using a nationwide registry database, we aimed to investigate whether digoxin is associated with 1-year all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure irrespective of phenotype.

METHODS

A total of 1014 out of 1054 patients in the registry, of whom 110 patients were on digoxin, were included in the study. Multivariable adjustments were done and propensity scores were calculated for various prognostic indicators, including signs and symptoms of heart failure and functional capacity. Crude mortality, mortality adjusted for covariates, mortality in the propensity score-matched cohort, and Bayesian factors (BFs) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Crude 1-year mortality rate did not differ between patients on and off digoxin (17.3% vs 20.1%, log-rank p = 0.46), and digoxin was not related to mortality following multivariable adjustment (hazard ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.539-1.402, p = 0.57). Similarly, all-cause mortality was similar in 220 propensity-score adjusted patients (17.3% vs 20.0%, log-rank p = 0.55). On Bayesian analyses, there was moderate to strong evidence suggesting a lack of difference between in unmatched cohort (BF10 0.091) and weak-to-moderate evidence in the matched cohort (BF10 0.296).

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide cohort, we did not find any evidence for an increased 1-year mortality in heart failure patients on digoxin.

Diuretic Treatment in Patients with Heart Failure: Current Evidence and Future Directions-Part II: Combination Therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Fluid retention or congestion is a major cause of symptoms, poor quality of life, and adverse outcome in patients with heart failure (HF). Despite advances in disease-modifying therapy, the mainstay of treatment for congestion-loop diuretics-has remained largely unchanged for 50 years. In these two articles (part I: loop diuretics and part II: combination therapy), we will review the history of diuretic treatment and current trial evidence for different diuretic strategies and explore potential future directions of research.

RECENT FINDINGS

We will assess recent trials, including DOSE, TRANSFORM, ADVOR, CLOROTIC, OSPREY-AHF, and PUSH-AHF, and assess how these may influence current practice and future research. There are few data on which to base diuretic therapy in clinical practice. The most robust evidence is for high-dose loop diuretic treatment over low-dose treatment for patients admitted to hospital with HF, yet this is not reflected in guidelines. There is an urgent need for more and better research on different diuretic strategies in patients with HF.

Observational studies to emulate randomized trials: Some real-world barriers

The randomized controlled trial (RCT) forms the basis for drug approval by regulatory agencies. Observational studies using existing data from healthcare databases now also provide real-world evidence (RWE) in regulatory decision-making. Several initiatives are assessing the value of RWE by conducting observational studies that emulate published RCTs. While many RCTs are straightforward to emulate, others are challenging. We describe three RCT design aspects that pose challenges for observational studies. First are trials that enrol already treated subjects who must discontinue these treatments at the time of randomization, which can distort the comparison with observational studies. Second is the inclusion of a run-in phase, especially to exclude non-compliant subjects from the trial. Third are trials that evaluate the effect of weaning off treatment. In conclusion, future randomized trials that aim to be emulated by observational studies could consider study designs that allow emulation and thus provide valid and complementary RWE.

Patterns of Digoxin Prescribing for Medicare Beneficiaries in the United States 2013-2019

Background

Studies show that digoxin use is declining but is still prevalent. Recent data on digoxin prescription and characteristics of digoxin prescribers are unknown, which can help understand its contemporary use.

Methods

Using Medicare Part D data from 2013 to 2019, we studied the change in number and proportion of digoxin prescriptions and digoxin prescribers, overall and by specialty. Using logistic regression, we identified prescriber characteristics associated with digoxin prescription.

Results

From 2013 to 2019, total digoxin prescriptions (4.6 to 1.8 million) and proportion of digoxin prescribers decreased (9.1% to 4.3% overall; 26.6% to 11.8% among General Medicine prescribers and 65.4% to 48.9% among Cardiology). Of digoxin prescribers from 2013 practicing in 2019 (91.2% remained active), 59.1% did not prescribe digoxin at all, 31.7% reduced, and 9.2% maintained or increased prescriptions. The proportion of all digoxin prescriptions that were prescribed by General Medicine prescribers declined from 59.7% to 48.2% and increased for Cardiology (29% to 38.5%). Among new prescribers in 2019 (N = 85,508), only 1.9% prescribed digoxin. Digoxin prescribers when compared to non-digoxin prescribers were more likely male, graduated from medical school earlier, were located in the Midwest or South, and belonged to Cardiology (all P < .001).

Conclusions

Digoxin prescriptions continue to decline with over half of 2013 prescribers no longer prescribing digoxin in 2019. This may be a result of the increasing availability of newer heart failure therapies. The decline in digoxin prescription was greater among general medicine physicians than cardiologists, suggesting a change in digoxin use to a medication prescribed increasingly by specialists.

Closing the Digitalis Divide: Back to the Basics of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

Publishe d decades after several randomized controlled trials (RCT) demonstrating decreased hospitalizations and no effect on all-cause mortality with digoxin use, a series of meta-analyses linking digoxin treatment and mortality have contributed to a narrower application of this medication for the management of heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF). Given the conflicting data from the earlier RCTs and more recent meta-analyses, there is a growing polarization among providers for and against the use of digoxin in managing these conditions.

METHODS

To help close this divide, we provide a perspective on the literature with special attention to the quality of both older and more recent studies on this subject.

RESULTS

The data from the highest quality studies we have, RCTs, suggest that digoxin use in patients with HF and/or AF is associated with improvement in several areas of outcomes including functional capacity, symptom management, reduced hospitalizations, fewer deaths due to HF, and treatment of refractory chronic heart failure with rEF, and may even have overall mortality benefit when serum digoxin concentrations are within therapeutic range. These effects are more pronounced in patients with EF < 25% and NYHA Class II-IV and at highest risk for hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

As the risk of confounding factors was minimized by the study design, the likelihood that positive outcomes were identified with digoxin use increased. Clinicians and researchers need further adequately designed and powered RCTs exploring the connection between digoxin therapy and mortality, hospitalizations, and symptom management.

The First Dedicated Comprehensive Heart Failure Program in the United States: The Division of Circulatory Physiology at Columbia Presbyterian (1992-2004)

The first dedicated multidisciplinary heart failure program in the United States was founded as the Division of Circulatory Physiology at the Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons in 1992. The Division was administratively and financially independent of the Division of Cardiology and grew to 24 faculty members at its peak. Its administrative innovations included (1) a comprehensive full-integrated service line, with 2 differentiated clinical teams, one devoted to drug therapy and the other to heart transplantation and ventricular assist devices; (2) a nurse specialist/physician assistant-led clinical service; and (3) a financial structure independent of (and not supported by) other cardiovascular medical or surgical services. The division had 3 overarching missions: (1) to promote a unique career development path for each faculty member to be linked to recognition in a specific area of heart failure expertise; (2) to change the trajectory and enhance the richness of intellectual discourse in the discipline of heart failure, so as to foster an understanding of fundamental mechanisms and to develop new therapeutics; and (3) to provide optimal medical care to patients and to promote the ability of other physicians to provide optimal care. The major research achievements of the division included (1) the development of beta-blockers for heart failure, from initial hemodynamic assessments to proof-of-concept studies to large-scale international trials; (2) the development and definitive assessment of flosequinan, amlodipine, and endothelin antagonists; (3) initial clinical trials and concerns with nesiritide; (4) large-scale trials evaluating dosing of angiotensin converting-enzyme inhibitors and the efficacy and safety of neprilysin inhibition; (5) identification of key mechanisms in heart failure, including neurohormonal activation, microcirculatory endothelial dysfunction, deficiencies in peripheral vasodilator pathways, noncardiac factors in driving dyspnea, and the first identification of subphenotypes of heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction; (6) the development of a volumetric approach to the assessment of myocardial shortening; (7) conceptualization and early studies of cardiac contractility modulation as a treatment for heart failure; (8) novel approaches to the identification of cardiac allograft rejection and new therapeutics to prevent allograft vasculopathy; and (9) demonstration of the effect of left ventricular assist devices to induce reverse remodeling, and the first randomized trial showing a survival benefit with ventricular assist devices. Above all, the division served as an exceptional incubator for a generation of leaders in the field of heart failure.

The four pillars of HFrEF therapy: is it time to treat heart failure regardless of ejection fraction?

The syndrome of heart failure (HF) has historically been dichotomized based on clinical trial inclusion criteria into patients with a reduced or preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) using a cut-off of above or below 40%. The majority of trial evidence for the benefits of disease-modifying pharmacological therapy has been in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), i.e. those with an LVEF ≤40%. Recently, the sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors empagliflozin and dapagliflozin have been shown to be the first drugs to improve outcomes in HF across the full spectrum of LVEF. There is, however, growing evidence that the benefits of many of the neurohumoral modulators shown to be beneficial in patients with HFrEF may extend to those with a higher LVEF above 40% but still below the normal range, i.e. HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF). Whether the benefits of some of these medications also extend to patients with HF and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is an area of ongoing debate. This article will review the evidence for HF treatments across the full spectrum of LVEF, provide an overview of recently updated clinical practice guidelines, and address the question whether it may now be time to treat HF with some therapies regardless of ejection fraction.

Optimal effectiveness of heart failure management - an umbrella review of meta-analyses examining the effectiveness of interventions to reduce (re)hospitalizations in heart failure

Heart failure (HF) is a major health concern, which accounts for 1-2% of all hospital admissions. Nevertheless, there remains a knowledge gap concerning which interventions contribute to effective prevention of HF (re)hospitalization. Therefore, this umbrella review aims to systematically review meta-analyses that examined the effectiveness of interventions in reducing HF-related (re)hospitalization in HFrEF patients. An electronic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, PsycInfo, Cochrane Reviews, CINAHL, and Medline to identify eligible studies published in the English language in the past 10 years. Primarily, to synthesize the meta-analyzed data, a best-evidence synthesis was used in which meta-analyses were classified based on level of validity. Secondarily, all unique RCTS were extracted from the meta-analyses and examined. A total of 44 meta-analyses were included which encompassed 186 unique RCTs. Strong or moderate evidence suggested that catheter ablation, cardiac resynchronization therapy, cardiac rehabilitation, telemonitoring, and RAAS inhibitors could reduce (re)hospitalization. Additionally, limited evidence suggested that multidisciplinary clinic or self-management promotion programs, beta-blockers, statins, and mitral valve therapy could reduce HF hospitalization. No, or conflicting evidence was found for the effects of cell therapy or anticoagulation. This umbrella review highlights different levels of evidence regarding the effectiveness of several interventions in reducing HF-related (re)hospitalization in HFrEF patients. It could guide future guideline development in optimizing care pathways for heart failure patients.

Responder analysis for improvement in 6-min walk test with ferric carboxymaltose in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and iron deficiency

AIM

Improving functional capacity is a key goal in heart failure (HF). This pooled analysis of FAIR-HF and CONFIRM-HF assessed the likelihood of improvement or deterioration in 6-min walk test (6MWT) among iron-deficient patients with chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) receiving ferric carboxymaltose (FCM).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Data for 760 patients (FCM: n = 454; placebo: n = 306) were analysed. The proportions of patients receiving FCM or placebo who had ≥20, ≥30, and ≥40 m improvements or ≥10 m deterioration in 6MWT at 12 and 24 weeks were assessed. Patients receiving FCM experienced a mean (standard deviation) 31.1 (62.3) m improvement in 6MWT versus 0.1 (77.1) m improvement for placebo at week 12 (difference in mean changes 26.8 [16.6-37.0]). At week 12, the odds [95% confidence interval] of 6MWT improvements of ≥20 m (odds ratio 2.16 [1.57-2.96]; p < 0.0001), ≥30 m (2.00 [1.44-2.78]; p < 0.0001), and ≥40 m (2.29 [1.60-3.27]; p < 0.0001) were greater with FCM versus placebo, while the odds of a deterioration ≥10 m were reduced with FCM versus placebo (0.55 [0.38-0.80]; p = 0.0019). Among patients who experienced 6MWT improvements of ≥20, ≥30, or ≥40 m with FCM at week 12, more than 80% sustained this improvement at week 24.

CONCLUSION

Ferric carboxymaltose resulted in a significantly higher likelihood of improvement and a reduced likelihood of deterioration in 6MWT versus placebo among iron-deficient patients with HF. Of the patients experiencing clinically significant improvements at week 12, the majority sustained this improvement at week 24. These results are supportive of FCM to improve exercise capacity in HF.

Digoxin Use in Atrial Fibrillation; Insights from National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the characteristics and trends of digoxin use during outpatient visits with atrial fibrillation in the US from 2006 to 2015.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of adult (age ≥18) patient visits to office-based physicians from National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) database between 2006-2015. The International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes were used to identify patients with atrial fibrillation. Visits in which digoxin was listed as a medication were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify the predictors of digoxin usage.

RESULTS

Of a weighted sample of 108,113,894 patient visits, 17,617,853 (16.3%) visits included use of digoxin. Patients who used digoxin had a mean age of 75 ± 0.7 years and were predominantly Caucasian (92.56%). Among the patients who used digoxin, 24% had a diagnosis of heart failure. Multivariate analysis showed that the increased likelihood of digoxin utilization was associated with female sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.34, 95% CI 1.05-1.71, p = .019), heart failure (aOR 1.51, 95% CI 1.05-1.17, p = .025), and usage of ³5 medications (aOR 5.32, 95% CI 3.67-7.71, p = <0.001). Among the visits with atrial fibrillation, the percentage of visits with digoxin usage decreased from 23% in 2006 to 9% in 2013 and then again increased to 14% in 2015(P-trend <0.001).

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to examine the use of digoxin in atrial fibrillation patients in a large outpatient setting. During 2006-2015, the percentage of digoxin prescriptions in atrial fibrillation patients has declined. Predictors of digoxin use in atrial fibrillation patients are female sex, congestive heart failure, and higher number of concurrent medications.

Contemporary Drug Treatment of Advanced Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

The introduction of multiple new pharmacological agents over the past three decades in the field of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has led to reduced rates of mortality and hospitalizations, and consequently the prevalence of HFrEF has increased, and up to 10% of patients progress to more advanced stages, characterized by high rates of mortality, hospitalizations, and poor quality of life. Advanced HFrEF patients often show persistent or progressive signs of severe HF symptoms corresponding to New York Heart Association class III or IV despite being on optimal medical, surgical, and device therapies. However, a subpopulation of patients with advanced HF, those with the most advanced stages of disease, were often insufficiently represented in the major trials demonstrating efficacy and tolerability of the drugs used in HFrEF due to exclusion criteria such as low BP and kidney dysfunction. Consequently, the results of many landmark trials cannot necessarily be transferred to patients with the most advanced stages of HFrEF. Thus, the efficacy and tolerability of guideline-directed medical therapies in patients with the most advanced stages of HFrEF often remain unsettled, and this knowledge is of crucial importance in the planning and timing of consideration for referral for advanced therapies. This review discusses the evidence regarding the use of contemporary drugs in the advanced HFrEF population, covering components such as guideline HFrEF drugs, diuretics, inotropes, and the use of HFrEF drugs in LVAD recipients, and provides suggestions on how to manage guideline-directed therapy in this patient group.

Digoxin Impact on Heart Failure Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Digoxin is a cardiac glycoside, derived from the plant Digitalis purpurea. For many years digitalis has been widely used in the treatment of heart failure (HF), owing to its cardiotonic and neurohormonal effects and atrial fibrillation (AF), due to its parasympathomimetic effect on the AV node.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper is to evaluate the available evidence on the safety and efficacy of digoxin in patients with HF and AF, by reviewing the pertinent literature.

METHODS

We conducted a PubMed/MEDLINE and SCOPUS search to evaluate the currently available evidence on the administration of digoxin and its association with all-cause mortality risk in patients with AF and HF.

RESULTS

Several observational analyses of clinical trials and meta-analyses have shown conflicting results on the safety and efficacy of digoxin administration in patients with AF and HF. According to these results, digoxin should be avoided in patients without HF, as it is associated with worse outcomes. On the other hand, in patients with AF and HF digoxin should be used with caution.

CONCLUSION

The impact of digoxin on all-cause mortality and adverse effects in these patients remains unclear based on the current evidence. More trials at low risk of bias evaluating the effects of digoxin are needed.

Association of Digoxin Application Approaches With Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Rheumatic Heart Disease Patients With Heart Failure: A Retrospective Study

Objective: This retrospective, case–control study was executed to assess the effects of digoxin (DGX) use approaches [continuous use of DGX (cDGX) vs. intermittent use of DGX (iDGX)] on the long-term prognosis in rheumatic heart disease (RHD) patients with heart failure (HF).

Methods: A total of 642 RHD patients were enrolled to this study after propensity matching. The associations of DGX application approaches with the risks of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death (CVD), HF re-hospitalization (1-, 3-, and 5-year), and new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) were analyzed by multivariate Cox proportional hazards or binary logistic regression models, respectively.

Results: cDGX was associated with increased risks of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR = 1.84, 95% CI: 1.27–2.65, P = 0.001) and CVD (adjusted HR = 2.23, 95% CI: 1.29–3.83, P = 0.004) in RHD patients with HF compared to iDGX. With exception of 1-year HF re-hospitalization risk, cDGX was associated with increased HF re-hospitalization risk of 3-year (adjusted OR = 1.53, 95% CI: 1.03–2.29, P = 0.037) and 5-year (adjusted OR = 1.61, 95% CI: 1.05–2.50, P = 0.031) as well as new-onset AF (adjusted OR = 2.06, 95% CI: 1.09–3.90, P = 0.027).

Conclusion: cDGX was significantly associated with increased risks of all-cause mortality, CVD, medium-/long-term HF re-hospitalization, and new-onset AF in RHD patients with HF.

Eisen und Digitalis bei Herzinsuffizienz

Neben der medikamentösen Standardtherapie der Herzinsuffizienz (HI) gilt es, Patienten zu identifizieren, die von einer Eisensupplementation oder Therapie mit Digitalis profitieren können. Wir haben die aktuelle Evidenz für diese Therapien zusammengestellt und beschreiben, wie die HI-Therapie mit Eisen und Digitalis individualisiert werden kann. Eine Eisensupplementation verbessert Leistungsfähigkeit, Symptome und Lebensqualität bei Patienten mit symptomatischer Herzinsuffizienz und Eisenmangel. Die Daten aus der unlängst publizierten AFFIRM-AHF-Studie zeigen, dass eine Eisentherapie mit Eisencarboxymaltose zudem HI-Hospitalisationen verhindert. Die Therapie mit Digitalis sollte bei fortgeschrittenen Stadien der Herzinsuffizienz mit reduzierter systolischer Funktion trotz leitliniengerechter Pharmako- und Devicetherapie in Erwägung gezogen werden, insbesondere, wenn diese aufgrund von Komorbiditäten nur eingeschränkt möglich ist. Auch bei koexistentem Vorhofflimmern ist Digitalis zur Herzfrequenzkontrolle von großem Wert. Serumkonzentrationen von Digitalis im niedrigen therapeutischen Bereich sind anzustreben.

Clinical Profiles and Outcomes of Heart Failure in Five African Countries: Results from INTER-CHF Study

Background:

A wide knowledge gap exists on the clinical profiles and outcomes of heart failure (HF) in sub-Saharan Africa.

Objectives:

To determine the clinical profiles and outcomes of HF patients from five African countries.

Methods:

The INTERnational Congestive Heart Failure Study (INTER-CHF) is a prospective, multicenter cohort study. A total of 1,294 HF patients were consecutively recruited from Nigeria (383 patients), South Africa (169 patients), Sudan (501 patients), Uganda (151patients), and Mozambique (90 patients). HF was defined according to the Boston criteria for diagnosis. Cognitive function was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score.

Results:

Of the 1294 patients, 51.4% were recruited as out-patients, 53.7% had HF with reduced ejection fraction (EF), 30.1% had HF with mid-range EF and 16.2% had HF with preserved EF (16.2%). The commonest etiologies of HF were hypertensive heart disease (35%) and ischemic heart disease (20%). The mean MoCA score was highest in Uganda (24.3 ± 1.1) and lowest in Sudan (13.6 ± 0.3). Prescriptions for guideline-recommended HF therapies were poor; only 1.2% of South African patients received an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator, and none of the patients received Cardiac Resynchronised Therapy. The composite outcome of death or HF hospitalization at one year among the patients was highest in Sudan (59.7%) and lowest in Mozambique (21.1%). Six variables were associated with higher mortality risk, while digoxin use (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49–0.97; p = 0.034) and 10mmHg unit increase in systolic blood pressure (aHR 0.86; 95%CI 0.81–0.93; p < 0.001) were associated with lower risk for mortality.

Conclusions:

This is the largest HF study in Africa that included in- and out-patients from the West, East, North, Central and South African sub-regions. Clinically relevant differences, including cognitive functional impairment, were found between the involved countries.

Current and Future Drug and Device Therapies for Pediatric Heart Failure Patients: Potential Lessons from Adult Trials

This review discusses the potential drug and device therapies for pediatric heart failure (HF) due to reduced systolic function. It is important to realize that most drugs that are used in pediatric HF are extrapolated from adult cardiology practices or consensus guidelines based on expert opinion rather than on evidence from controlled clinical trials. It is difficult to conclude whether the drugs that are well established in adult HF trials are also beneficial for children because of tremendous heterogeneity in the mechanism of HF in children and variations in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of drugs from birth to adolescence. The lessons learned from adult trials can guide pediatric cardiologists to design clinical trials of the newer drugs that are in the pipeline to study their efficacy and safety in children with HF. This paper's focus is that the reader should specifically think through the pathophysiological mechanism of HF and the mode of action of drugs for the selection of appropriate pharmacotherapy. We review the drug and device trials in adults with HF to highlight the knowledge gap that exists in the pediatric HF population.

Treatment of HF in an Era of Multiple Therapies: Statement From the HF Collaboratory

The treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has changed considerably over time, particularly with the sequential development of therapies aimed at antagonism of maladaptive biologic pathways, including inhibition of the sympathetic nervous system and the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system. The sequential nature of earlier HFrEF trials allowed the integration of new therapies tested against the background therapy of the time. More recently, multiple heart failure therapies are being evaluated simultaneously, and the number of therapeutic choices for treating HFrEF has grown considerably. In addition, implementation science has lagged behind discovery science in heart failure. Furthermore, given there are currently >200 ongoing clinical trials in heart failure, further complexities are anticipated. In an effort to provide a decision-making framework in the current era of expanding therapeutic options in HFrEF, the Heart Failure Collaboratory convened a multi-stakeholder group, including patients, clinicians, clinical investigators, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, industry, and payers who met at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration campus on March 6, 2020. This paper summarizes the discussions and expert consensus recommendations.

The Role of Digoxin in the Treatment of Chronic Congestive Heart Failure

It is now well established that digoxin is an effective drug for the treatment of heart failure. Since treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors reduces mortality in congestive heart failure, digoxin should be added to ACE inhibitors in patients with moderate or severe heart failure. The beneficial effects of digoxin may be due, in part, to its well-documented sympathoinhibitory effects that can avert the adverse effects of long-term excessive sympathetic adrenergic stimulation in heart failure.

Digoxin, mortality, and cardiac hospitalizations in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and atrial fibrillation: An AF-CHF analysis

BACKGROUND

Recent publications have raised serious concerns regarding the safety of digoxin for atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the subgroup of patients with reduced ejection fraction and AF have been speculated to derive clinical benefit from digoxin. We aimed to assess the impact of digoxin on mortality and cardiovascular hospitalizations in the Atrial Fibrillation and Congestive Heart Failure (AF-CHF) trial since all AF-CHF patients had an ejection fraction ≤35% and AF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using marginal structural modeling, a contemporary statistical method that overcomes limitations of traditional modeling techniques and reduces bias, we assessed the impact of digoxin on the pre-specified primary and secondary outcomes of the AF-CHF trial, i.e., all-cause, cardiac and arrhythmic death as well as cardiovascular hospitalization. Among 1376 patients, 869 (65%) were on digoxin at one-year follow-up. Over a mean (SD) follow-up of 37 (19) months (maximum 74 months), 445 (32%) patients died, 357 (26%) from cardiovascular causes and 159 (12%) from arrhythmic death. Digoxin was significantly associated with all-cause, cardiac, and arrhythmic death, with estimated hazard ratios (HR) of 1.39 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.73, P = 0.004), 1.44 (95% CI 1.13-1.82, P = 0.003), and 2.03 (95% CI 1.63-2.54, P < 0.0001), respectively. Digoxin was not associated with cardiovascular hospitalizations [HR 1.12 (95% CI 0.91-1.37), P = 0.29].

CONCLUSION

Digoxin is associated with increased all-cause mortality among patients with combined heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and AF, which is predominantly driven by arrhythmic deaths. In contrast, cardiovascular hospitalizations were not impacted by digoxin.

Heart Failure: A Palliative Medicine Review of Disease, Therapies, and Medications With a Focus on Symptoms, Function, and Quality of Life

Despite significant advances in heart failure (HF) treatment, HF remains a progressive, extremely symptomatic, and terminal disease with a median survival of 2.1 years after diagnosis. HF often leads to a constellation of symptoms, including dyspnea, fatigue, depression, anxiety, insomnia, pain, and worsened cognitive function. Palliative care is an approach that improves the quality of life of patients and their caregivers facing the problems associated with life-threatening illness and therefore is well suited to support these patients. However, historically, palliative care has often focused on supporting patients with malignant disease, rather than a progressive chronic disease such as HF. Predicting mortality in patients with HF is challenging. The lack of obvious transition points in disease progression also raises challenges to primary care providers and specialists to know at what point to integrate palliative care during a patient's disease trajectory. Although therapies for HF often result in functional and symptomatic improvements including health-related quality of life (HRQL), some patients with HF do not demonstrate these benefits, including those patients with a preserved ejection fraction. Provision of palliative care for patients with HF requires an understanding of HF pathogenesis and common medications used for these patients, as well as an approach to balancing life-prolonging and HRQL care strategies. This review describes HF and current targeted therapies and their effects on symptoms, hospital admission rates, exercise performance, HRQL, and survival. Pharmacological interactions with and precautions related to commonly used palliative care medications are reviewed. The goal of this review is to equip palliative care clinicians with information to make evidence-based decisions while managing the balance between optimal disease management and patient quality of life.

Increase in PKCα Activity during Heart Failure Despite the Stimulation of PKCα Braking Mechanism

Rationale: Heart failure (HF) is marked by dampened cardiac contractility. A mild therapeutic target that improves contractile function without desensitizing the β-adrenergic system during HF may improve cardiac contractility and potentially survival. Inhibiting protein kinase C α (PKCα) activity may fit the criteria of a therapeutic target with milder systemic effects that still boosts contractility in HF patients. PKCα activity has been observed to increase during HF. This increase in PKCα activity is perplexing because it is also accompanied by up-regulation of a molecular braking mechanism. Objective: I aim to explore how PKCα activity can be increased and maintained during HF despite the presence of a molecular braking mechanism. Methods and Results: Using a computational approach, I show that the local diacylglycerol (DAG) signaling is regulated through a two-compartment signaling system in cardiomyocytes. These results imply that after massive myocardial infarction (MI), local homeostasis of DAG signaling is disrupted. The loss of this balance leads to prolonged activation of PKCα, a key molecular target linked to LV remodeling and dysfunctional filling and ejection in the mammalian heart. This study also proposes an explanation for how DAG homeostasis is regulated during normal systolic and diastolic cardiac function. Conclusions: I developed a novel two-compartment computational model for regulating DAG homeostasis during Ang II-induced heart failure. This model provides a promising tool with which to study mechanisms of DAG signaling regulation during heart failure. The model can also aid in identification of novel therapeutic targets with the aim of improving the quality of life for heart failure patients.

Digoxin is associated with worse outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

AIMS

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of digoxin use on the outcomes of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and its possible interaction with atrial fibrillation or use of currently guideline-recommended treatments in the real world in China.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients hospitalized with HFrEF from 45 hospitals participating in the China National Heart Failure Registration Study (CN-HF) were enrolled to assess the all-cause mortality, HF mortality, all-cause re-hospitalization, and HF re-hospitalization associated with digoxin use. Eight hundred eighty-two eligible HFrEF patients in the CN-HF registry were included: 372 patients with digoxin and 510 patients without digoxin. Among them, 794 (90.0%) patients were followed up for the endpoint events, with a median follow-up of 28.6 months. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that the all-cause mortality (P < 0.001) and all-cause re-hospitalization (P = 0.020) were significantly higher in digoxin group than non-digoxin group, while HF mortality (P = 0.232) and HF re-hospitalization (P = 0.098) were similar between the two groups. The adjusted Cox proportional-hazards regression analysis demonstrated that digoxin use remained as an independent risk factor for increased all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.76; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27-2.44; P = 0.001] and all-cause re-hospitalization (HR 1.27; 95% CI 1.03-1.57; P = 0.029) in HFrEF patients and the predictive value of digoxin for all-cause mortality irrespective of rhythm or in combination with other guideline-recommended therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Digoxin use is independently associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality and all-cause re-hospitalization in HFrEF patients.

[Treatment of chronic heart failure: is deprescribing possible?]

Deprescribing is a scheduled withdrawal, dose reduction, or replacement of a medicine with a safer one. Several groups of medicinal products (MPs) are used simultaneously in the treatment of chronic heart failure. This increases the risk of adverse drug reactions, particularly in elderly and senile patients. A systematic search for literature allowed evaluating possibilities of deprescribing for the following pharmaceutic groups: 1) MPs influencing the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system; 2) beta-blockers; 3) digoxin; and 4) diuretics. Three systematic reviews and several studies were analyzed to determine the most feasible and potentially optimal regimens of deprescribing in CHF. It was established that in CHF, deprescribing has a very limited potential for use due to the documented, obvious effect of some MP groups on prediction and severity of clinical symptoms in CHF patients.

Heart Failure End Points in Cardiovascular Outcome Trials of Sodium Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Critical Evaluation of Clinical and Regulatory Issues

Following regulatory guidance set forth in 2008 by the US Food and Drug Administration for new drugs for type 2 diabetes mellitus, many large randomized, controlled trials have been conducted with the primary goal of assessing the safety of antihyperglycemic medications on the primary end point of major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Heart failure (HF) was not specifically mentioned in the US Food and Drug Administration guidance and therefore it was not a focus of these studies when planned. Several trials subsequently showed the impact of antihyperglycemic drugs on HF outcomes, which were not originally specified as the primary end point of the trials. The most impressive finding has been the substantial and consistent risk reduction in HF hospitalization seen across 4 trials of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. However, to date, these results have not led to regulatory approval of any of these drugs for a HF indication or a recommendation for use by US HF guidelines. It is therefore important to explore to what extent persuasive treatment effects on nonprimary end points can be used to support regulatory claims and guideline recommendations. This topic was discussed by researchers, clinicians, industry sponsors, regulators, and representatives from professional societies, who convened on the US Food and Drug Administration campus on March 6, 2019. This report summarizes these discussions and the key takeaway messages from this meeting.

Digitoxin Attenuates Heart Failure, Reduces Myocardial Hypertrophy, and Preserves the Calcium-Binding Proteins in Infarcted Rats

We previously showed that digitoxin prolongs the survival of rats with heart failure due to myocardial infarction (MI). In this study, we evaluated the effect of digitoxin on myocardial structure, ventricular function, and proteins involved in calcium kinetics. Seventy-two rats with MI >35% of the left ventricle were randomly assigned to 4 treatment groups: sham (n = 15), digitoxin (n = 11), infarction (n = 20), and infarction + digitoxin (n = 26). The rats were assessed 120 days after surgery by echocardiogram, hemodynamics, papillary muscle mechanics, collagen content, cardiomyocyte nuclear volume, and Western blot analysis of proteins involved in calcium kinetics. Digitoxin was administered via the rat chow. Two-way analysis of variance was used for comparisons. Myocardial infarction caused inotropic impairment, pulmonary congestion, increase of nuclear volume, myocardial collagen, and Na⁺/Ca2⁺ exchanger levels, and decreased SERCA2 and phosphorylated phospholamban levels. Treatment with digitoxin showed improvements in cardiac remodeling, inotropism, ventricular performance, pulmonary congestion, collagen accumulation, nuclear volume, and proteins involved in calcium kinetics. In rats with heart failure due to MI, long-term treatment with digitoxin attenuates congestive heart failure, mitigates myocardial remodeling and contractile impairment, and preserves myocardial levels of proteins involved in calcium kinetics.

Hemodynamic effects of inotropic drugs in heart failure: A network meta-analysis of clinical trials

BACKGROUND

There is currently no consensus on the appropriate selection of inotropic therapy in ventricular dysfunction. The objective of the study was to detect the effects of different inotropes on the hemodynamics of patients who developed low cardiac output.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched (all updated December 31, 2017). The inclusion criteria were as follows: low cardiac index (CI < 2.5 L/min/m) or New York Heart Association class II-IV, and at least 1 group receiving an inotropic drug compared to another group receiving a different inotropic/placebo treatment. The exclusion criteria were studies published as an abstract only, crossover studies, and studies with a lack of data on the cardiac index.

RESULTS

A total of 1402 patients from 37 trials were included in the study. Inotropic drugs were shown to increase the cardiac index (0.32, 95%CI:0.25, 0.38), heart rate (7.68, 95%CI:6.36, 9.01), and mean arterial pressure (3.17, 95%CI:1.96, 4.38) than the placebo. Overall, the pooled estimates showed no difference in terms of cardiac index, heart rate, mean arterial pressure, systemic vascular resistance, and mean pulmonary arterial pressure among the groups receiving different inotropes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review found that inotrope therapy is not associated with the amelioration of hemodynamics. An accurate evaluation of the benefits and risks, and selection of the correct inotropic agent is required in all clinical settings.

Digoxin Discontinuation and Outcomes in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

The deleterious effects of discontinuation of digoxin on outcomes in ambulatory patients with chronic heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors are well-documented.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to determine the relationship between digoxin discontinuation and outcomes in hospitalized patients with HFrEF receiving more contemporary guideline-directed medical therapies including beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists.

METHODS

Of the 11,900 hospitalized patients with HFrEF (EF ≤45%) in the Medicare-linked OPTIMIZE-HF (Organized Program to Initiate Lifesaving Treatment in Hospitalized Patients with Heart Failure) registry, 3,499 received pre-admission digoxin, which was discontinued in 721 patients. Using propensity scores for digoxin discontinuation, estimated for each of the 3,499 patients, a matched cohort of 698 pairs of patients, balanced on 50 baseline characteristics (mean age 76 years; mean EF 28%; 41% women; 13% African American; 65% on beta-blockers) was assembled.

RESULTS

Four-year post-discharge, digoxin discontinuation was associated with significantly higher risks of HF readmission (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05 to 1.39; p = 0.007), all-cause readmission (HR: 1.16; 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.31; p = 0.010), and the combined endpoint of HF readmission or all-cause mortality (HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.34; p = 0.002), but not all-cause mortality (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.97 to 1.24; p = 0.163). Discontinuation of digoxin was associated with a significantly higher risk of all 4 outcomes at 6 months and 1 year post-discharge. At 30 days, digoxin discontinuation was associated with higher risks of all-cause mortality (HR: 1.80; 95% CI: 1.26 to 2.57; p = 0.001) and the combined endpoint (HR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.71; p = 0.007), but not of HF readmission (HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.59; p = 0.226) or all-cause readmission (HR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.84 to 1.26; p = 0.778).

CONCLUSIONS

Among hospitalized older patients with HFrEF on more contemporary guideline-directed medical therapies, discontinuation of pre-admission digoxin therapy was associated with poor outcomes.

Evaluation of drugs used in chronic heart failure at tertiary care centre: a hospital based study

Introduction: There is lack of data on pattern of use of drugs in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) from Nepalese population. This study was conducted to explore the trends of evidence based medications used for CHF in our population. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study on 200 consecutive patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II to IV symptoms of CHF who attended cardiology clinic or admitted from September 2017 to August 2018 at Nobel Medical College Teaching Hospital, Biratnagar, Nepal. Results: Mean age of patients was 54 (range 15-90) years. Ischemic cardiomyopathy, rheumatic heart disease, dilated cardiomyopathy, hypertensive heart disease, peripartum cardiomyopathy were common etiologies of CHF. Analysis of drugs used in CHF revealed that 85% patients were prescribed diuretics, 58.5% angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), 53% mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), 38% beta-blockers (BBs) and 24% digoxin. Digoxin was mainly used as add on therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation (24% of all patients). Antithrombotics (warfarin or aspirin), inotropic agents (dopamine, dobutamine or noradrenaline), antiarrhythmic agent (amiodarone) and nitrates (intravenous glyceryl trinitrate or oral isosorbide dinitrate) were prescribed for 48%, 28%, 5% and 6% patients respectively. All CHF patients with preserved or mid-range ejection fraction (25% of all patients) were prescribed diuretics along with antihypertensive drugs for hypertensive patients. Conclusion: CHF is associated with significant morbidity and mortality due to associated co-morbidities and underuse of proven therapy like BBs, ACEIs or ARBs and MRAs. Careful attention to optimization of different drugs therapy in patients with CHF may help to improve patient outcomes.

Maternal monitoring and safety considerations during antiarrhythmic treatment for fetal supraventricular tachycardia

Fetal tachycardia is a rare complication during pregnancy. After exclusion of maternal and fetal conditions that can result in a secondary fetal tachycardia, supraventricular tachycardia is the most common cause of a primary sustained fetal tachyarrhythmia. In cases of sustained fetal supraventricular tachycardia, maternal administration of digoxin, flecainide, sotalol, and more rarely amiodarone, is considered. As these medications have the potential to cause significant adverse effects, we sought to examine maternal safety during transplacental treatment of fetal supraventricular tachycardia. In this narrative review we summarize the literature addressing pharmacologic properties, monitoring, and adverse reactions associated with medications most commonly prescribed for transplacental therapy of fetal supraventricular tachycardia. We also describe maternal monitoring practices and adverse events currently reported in the literature. In light of our findings, we provide clinicians with a suggested maternal monitoring protocol aimed at optimizing safety.

Rationale and design of the DIGIT-HF trial (DIGitoxin to Improve ouTcomes in patients with advanced chronic Heart Failure): a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

AIMS

Despite recent advances in the treatment of chronic heart failure (HF), mortality and hospitalizations still remain high. Additional therapies to improve mortality and morbidity are urgently needed. The efficacy of cardiac glycosides - although regularly used for HF treatment - remains unclear. DIGIT-HF was designed to demonstrate that digitoxin on top of standard of care treatment improves mortality and morbidity in patients with HF and a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS

Patients with chronic HF, New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III-IV and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 40%, or patients in NYHA functional class II and LVEF ≤ 30% are randomized 1:1 in a double-blind fashion to treatment with digitoxin (target serum concentration 8-18 ng/mL) or matching placebo. Randomization is stratified by centre, sex, NYHA functional class (II, III, or IV), atrial fibrillation, and treatment with cardiac glycosides at baseline. A total of 2190 eligible patients will be included in this clinical trial (1095 per group). All patients receive standard of care treatment recommended by expert guidelines upon discretion of the treating physician. The primary outcome is a composite of all-cause mortality or hospital admission for worsening HF (whatever occurs first). Key secondary endpoints are all-cause mortality, hospital admission for worsening HF, and recurrent hospital admission for worsening HF.

CONCLUSION

The DIGIT-HF trial will provide important evidence, whether the cardiac glycoside digitoxin reduces the risk for all-cause mortality and/or hospital admission for worsening HF in patients with advanced chronic HFrEF on top of standard of care treatment.

Influence of OATP1B1 and OATP1B3 mutations and glomerular filtration rate on trough serum digoxin concentration in the Chinese population: A prospective cohort study

Polymorphisms of organic anion transporting polypeptides (OATPs) have been reported to affect trough serum digoxin concentration (SDC). However, the association of these polymorphisms with trough SDC in Chinese heart failure patients has not been studied. We aim to explore whether OATP1B1 388A>G, OATP1B1 521T>C, and OATP1B3 699G>A influence trough SDC in Chinese heart failure patients and to make clinical recommendations.Chinese patients (n = 104) diagnosed with heart failure under long-term digoxin therapy (0.125 mg daily) were enrolled in this study. Blood samples were collected for the analysis of trough SDC (immunofluorescence) and the polymorphisms of OATP1B1 388A>G, OATP1B1 521T>C, and OATP1B3 699G>A (PCR-RFLP and Sanger sequencing).Patients with glomerular filtration rate (GFR) under 30 mL/min had significantly higher trough SDC (1.20 ± 0.50 ng/mL) than recommended trough SDC for heart failure patients. Trough SDC was not significantly influenced by mutations of OATP1B1 388A>G (P = .890), 521T>C (P = .054), and OATP1B3 699G>A (P = .854). Patients with OATP1B1 521T>C mutant-type carrier had slightly higher trough SDC (0.98 ± 0.53 ng/mL) than those with wild-type carrier (0.74 ± 0.40 ng/mL) when they have repaired renal function.Heart failure patients with severe renal dysfunction (GFR<60 mL/min) and/or OATP1B1 521T>C mutant-type carriers are recommended a smaller dosage of digoxin and strict therapeutic drug monitoring.

Digoxin and prognosis of heart failure in older patients with preserved ejection fraction: Importance of heart rate. Results from an observational and multicenter study

BACKGROUND

The value of digoxin in heart failure (HF) remains controversial, particularly in patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). This study evaluated the 1-year risk of events after digoxin treatment for acute heart failure (AHF) in patients >70 years old with HFpEF.

METHODS

1833 patients were included in this analysis (mean age, 82 years). The main endpoints were all-cause death and the composite of death and/or HF re-admission within 1 year. Cox regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between digoxin treatment and prognosis.

RESULTS

401 patients received digoxin treatment; of these, 86% had atrial fibrillation. The mean baseline heart rate was 86 ± 22 bpm. At the 1-year follow-up, 375 patients (20.5%) died and 684 (37.3%) presented composite endpoints. Patients treated with digoxin showed higher rates of death (3.21 vs. 2.44 per 10 person-years, p = .019) and composite endpoint (6.72 vs. 5.18 per 10 person-years, p = .003). After multivariate adjustment, digoxin treatment remained associated with increased risks of death (HR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.16-1.85, p = .001) and the composite endpoint (HR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.13-1.61, p = .001). A distinctive prognostic effect of digoxin was found across the heart rate continuum; the risks for both endpoints were higher at lower heart rates and neutral at higher heart rates (p of the interactions = 0.007 and 0.03, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In older patients with HFpEF discharged after AHF, digoxin treatment was associated with increased mortality and/or re-admission, particularly in patients with lower heart rates.

Systematic review of economic burden of heart failure

The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review of the costing methodological approaches adopted by published cost-of-illness (COI) studies. A systematic review was performed to identify cost-of-illness studies of heart failure published between January 2003 and September 2015 via computerized databases such as Pubmed, Wiley Online, Science Direct, Web of Science, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). Costs reported in the original studies were converted to 2014 international dollars (Int$). Thirty five out of 4972 studies met the inclusion criteria. Nineteen out of the 35 studies reported the costs as annual cost per patient, ranging from Int$ 908.00 to Int$ 84,434.00, while nine studies reported costs as per hospitalization, ranging from Int$ 3780.00 to Int$ 34,233.00. Cost of heart failure increased as condition of heart failure worsened from New York Heart Association (NYHA) class I to NYHA class IV. Hospitalization cost was found to be the main cost driver to the total health care cost. The annual cost of heart failure ranges from Int$ 908 to Int$ 40,971 per patient. The reported cost estimates were inconsistent across the COI studies, mainly due to the variation in term of methodological approaches such as disease definition, epidemiological approach of study, study perspective, cost disaggregation, estimation of resource utilization, valuation of unit cost components, and data sources used. Such variation will affect the reliability, consistency, validity, and relevance of the cost estimates across studies.

Prognosis of heart failure treated with digoxin or with ivabradine: A cohort study in the community

BACKGROUND

Resting heart rate (HR) reduction with ivabradine (IVA) improves outcomes of patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Nevertheless, the best option to slow HR in patients with HFrEF treated with beta-blockers and a HR >70 bpm is unsettled.

AIMS

To evaluate whether, in patients with HFrEF, commencing therapy with digoxin (CT-DIG) is associated to a worse prognosis than commencing treatment with ivabradine (CT-IVA).

METHODS

Observational study over 10 years on 2364 patients with HFrEF in sinus rhythm and a HR >70 bpm. Main outcomes were mortality, hospitalisations and visits. We analyse the independent relationship of CT-DIG or CT-IVA with the prognosis, stratifying patients for cardiovascular comorbidity, and for other potential confounders (378 patients who CT-DIG vs another 355 patients who CT-IVA vs another 1631 patients non-exposed to IVA or DIG).

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 57.5 months, 1751 patients (74.1%) died, and 2151 (91.0%) were hospitalised for HF. CT-DIG or CT-IVA was associated with a lower all-cause mortality (DIG: HR = 0.86 [95% CI, 0.82-0.90], and IVA: HR = 0.88 [0.83-0.93]), cardiovascular mortality (DIG: HR = 0.84 [0.80-0.89] and IVA: HR = 0.83 [0.78-0.89]), hospitalisation (DIG: HR = 0.86 [0.83-0.89] and IVA: HR = 0.87 [0.83-0.91]) and 30-day readmission (DIG: HR = 0.84 [0.79-0.90] and IVA: HR = 0.88 [0.79-0.95]), after adjustment for cardiovascular comorbidity, and other potential confounders. These associations with the prognosis of HFrEF did not differ between patients who CT-DIG and those who CT-IVA.

CONCLUSION

Commencing therapy with digoxin or with ivabradine is associated with an improved prognosis of patients with HFrEF.

Management of advanced heart failure: a review

INTRODUCTION

Heart failure (HF) has become a global pandemic. Despite recent developments in both medical and device treatments, HF incidences continues to increase. The current definition of HF restricts itself to stages at which clinical symptoms are apparent. In advanced heart failure (AdHF), it is universally accepted that all patients are refractory to traditional therapies. As the number of HF patients increase, so does the need for additional treatments, with an increased proportion of patients requiring advanced therapies. Areas covered: This review discusses extensive evidence for the effect of medical treatment on HF, although the data on the effect on AdHF is scare. Authors review the relevant literature for treating AdHF patients. Furthermore, mechanical circulatory devices (MCD) have emerged as an alternative to heart transplantation and have been shown to enhance quality of life and reduce mortality therefore authors also review the current literature on the different MCD and technologies. Expert commentary: More patients will need advanced therapies, as the access to heart transplantation is limited by the number of available donors. AdHF patients should be identified timely since the window of opportunities for advanced therapy is narrow as their morbidity is progressive and survival is often short.

Effect of digitalis level on readmission and mortality rate among heart failure reduced ejection fraction patients

INTRODUCTION

Digitalis has been used for over 200 years to treat patients with heart failure, and evidence supports its use to improve clinical symptoms and quality of life, but not survival. The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate the effects of digitalis on readmission and mortality in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who were receiving current guideline recommended medical therapy.

METHODS

We reviewed medical record data from a retrospective cohort study of 1047 patients admitted to the hospital from 2005 to 2014 with decompensated HFrEF. 244 received digitalis, at some point during patient trajectory, and 803 never received digitalis. The primary outcomes of interest were the length of stay in hospital, readmission rates after discharge at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months and the overall mortality rate, at the same time points.

RESULTS

We studied the effects of digitalis after adjusting for age, sex, race, potentially confounding comorbidities, and prescription medications. Digitalis treatment is associated with decreases in EF in patients with HFrEF (OR = -2.83, P < 0.001) and was associated with an increased readmission rate for any reason after discharge from the hospital at 6, 12, and 24 months, 53%, 34%, and 35%, respectively. No statistically significant difference was found between patients who received digitalis and those who did not (referent group) for the length of hospital stay and overall mortality rate.

CONCLUSION

Digitalis use is associated with increased re-admission rates for any reason following discharge from the hospital at 6, 12, and 24 months.

Left ventricular ejection fraction as therapeutic target: is it the ideal marker?

Heart failure (HF) consists the fastest growing clinical cardiac disease. HF patients are categorized on the basis of underlying left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) into HF with preserved EF (HFpEF), reduced LVEF (HFrEF), and mid-range LVEF (HFmrEF). While LVEF is the most commonly used surrogate marker of left ventricular (LV) systolic function, the implementation of two-dimensional echocardiography in estimating this parameter imposes certain caveats on current HF classification. Most importantly, LVEF could fluctuate in repeated measurements or even recover after treatment, thus blunting the borders between proposed categories of HF and enabling upward classification of patients. Under this prism, we sought to summarize possible procedures to improve systolic function in patients with HFrEF either naturally or by the means of pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatment and devices. Therefore, we reviewed established pharmacotherapy, including beta-blockers, inhibitors of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis, statins, and digoxin as well as novel treatments like sacubitril-valsartan, ranolazine, and ivabradine. In addition, we assessed evidence in favor of cardiac resynchronization therapy and exercise training programs. Finally, innovative therapeutic strategies, including stem cells, xanthine oxidase inhibitors, antibiotic regimens, and omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, were also taken into consideration. We concluded that LVEF is subject to changes in HF after intervention and besides the aforementioned HFrEF, HFpEF, and HFmrEF categories, a new entity of HF patients with recovered LVEF should be acknowledged. An improved global and refined LV function assessment by sophisticated imaging modalities and circulating biomarkers is expected to render HF classification more accurate and indicate patients with viable-yet dysfunctional-myocardium and favorable characteristics as the ideal candidates for LVEF recovery by individualized HF therapy.

Digoxin Benefit Varies by Risk of Heart Failure Hospitalization: Applying the Tufts MC HF Risk Model

BACKGROUND

Digoxin has been shown to reduce heart failure hospitalizations with a neutral effect on mortality. It is unknown whether there is heterogeneity of treatment effect for digitalis therapy according to predicted risk of heart failure hospitalization.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a post hoc analysis of the Digitalis Investigator Group (DIG) studies, randomized controlled trials of digoxin vs placebo in participants with heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤45% (main DIG study, n = 6800) or >45% (ancillary DIG study, n = 988). Using a previously derived multistate model to risk-stratify DIG study participants, we determined the differential treatment effect on hospitalization and mortality outcomes. There was a 13% absolute reduction in the risk of any heart failure hospitalizations (39% vs 52%; odds ratio 0.58; 95% confidence interval 0.47-0.71) in the digoxin vs placebo arms in the highest-risk quartile, compared with a 3% absolute risk reduction for any heart failure hospitalization (17% vs 20%; odds ratio 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-1.08) in the lowest-risk quartile. There were 12 fewer total all-cause hospitalizations per 100 person-years in the highest-risk quartile compared with an increase of 8 hospitalizations per 100 person-years in the lowest-risk quartile. There was neutral effect of digoxin on mortality in all risk quartiles and no interaction between baseline risk and the effect of digoxin on mortality (P = .94).

CONCLUSIONS

Participants in the DIG study at higher risk of hospitalization as identified by a multistate model were considerably more likely to benefit from digoxin therapy to reduce heart failure hospitalization.

Prevalent digoxin use and subsequent risk of death or hospitalization in ambulatory heart failure patients with a reduced ejection fraction-Findings from the Heart Failure: A Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise Training (HF-ACTION) randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Despite more than 200 years of clinical experience and a pivotal trial, recently published research has called into question the safety and efficacy of digoxin therapy in heart failure (HF).

METHODS

HF-ACTION (ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT00047437) enrolled 2331 outpatients with HF and an EF ≤35% between April 2003 and February 2007 and randomized them to aerobic exercise training versus usual care. Patients were grouped according to prevalent digoxin status at baseline. The association between digoxin therapy and outcomes was assessed using Cox proportional hazard and inverse-probability weighted (IPW) regression models adjusted for demographics, medical history, medications, laboratory values, quality of life, and exercise parameters.

RESULTS

The prevalence of digoxin therapy decreased from 52% during the first 6 months of enrollment to 35% at the end of the HF-ACTION trial (P <0.0001). Study participants were 59± 13 years of age, 72% were male, and approximately half had an ischemic etiology of HF. Patients receiving digoxin at baseline tended to be younger and were more likely to report New York Heart Association functional class III/IV symptoms (rather than class II) compared to those not receiving digoxin. Patients taking digoxin had worse baseline exercise capacity as measured by peak VO₂ and 6-min walk test and greater impairments in health status as reflected by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire. The association between digoxin and the risk of death or hospitalization differed depending on whether Cox proportional hazard (Hazard Ratio 1.03, 95% Confidence Interval 0.92-1.16; P = .62) or IPW regression models (HR 1.08, 95% CI 1.00-1.17; P = .057) were used to adjust for potential confounders.

CONCLUSION

Although digoxin use was associated with high-risk clinical features, the association between digoxin therapy and outcomes was dependent on the statistical methods used for multivariable adjustment. Clinical equipoise exists and additional prospective research is required to clarify the role of digoxin in contemporary clinical practice including its effects on functional capacity, quality of life, and long-term outcomes.

Contemporary Controversies in Digoxin Use in Systolic Heart Failure

Digoxin remains one of the oldest therapies for heart failure; however, its safety and efficacy have been controversial since its initial use. Questions that remain include the clinical efficacy of digoxin when added to contemporary medical therapy, when and if it should be added, and how to minimize adverse effects. In this review, we will summarize recent data on the use of digoxin in systolic heart failure and address some of the controversies regarding the role of digoxin in the modern era of heart failure treatment.

Rational and design of a randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial to evaluate the safety and tolerability of furosemide withdrawal in stable chronic outpatients with heart failure: The ReBIC-1 trial

AIMS

Furosemide is commonly prescribed for symptom relief in heart failure (HF) patients. Although few data support the continuous use of loop diuretics in apparently euvolemic HF patients with mild symptoms, there is concern about safety of diuretic withdrawal in these patients. The ReBIC-1 trial was designed to evaluate the safety and tolerability of withdrawing furosemide in stable, euvolemic, chronic HF outpatients. This multicenter initiative is part of the Brazilian Research Network in Heart Failure (ReBIC) created to develop clinical studies in HF and composed predominantly by university tertiary care hospitals.

METHODS

The ReBIC-1 trial is currently enrolling HF patients in NYHA functional class I-II, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤45%, without a HF-related hospital admission within the last 6 months, receiving a stable dose of furosemide (40 or 80 mg per day) for at least 6 months. Eligible patients will be randomized to maintain or withdraw furosemide in a double-blinded protocol. The trial has two co-primary outcomes: (1) dyspnea assessment using a visual-analogue scale evaluated at 4 time points and (2) the proportion of patients maintained without diuretics during the follow-up period. Total sample size was calculated to be 220 patients. Enrolled patients will be followed up to 90 days after randomization, and diuretic will be restarted if clinical deterioration or signs of congestion are detected. Pre-defined sub-group analysis based on NT-proBNP levels at baseline is planned.

PERSPECTIVE

Evidence-based strategies aiming to simplify HF pharmacotherapy are needed in clinical practice. The ReBIC-1 trial will determine the safety of withdrawing furosemide in stable chronic HF patients.